As Syria tears itself apart and Damascus, its capital, is riven with a bitter civil war, attention has focussed on three passages of the Bible which foretell the complete and utter destruction of the city of Damascus.

One of them, the most detailed, is in the first few verses of Isaiah Chapter 17 (the other passages are in Jeremiah and in Psalm 83). It may be that Damascus will not be completely destroyed in the current conflict. But many Biblical commentators contend that it will be.

The author below wrote this piece over 7 years ago, in 2005. He foreshadowed the destruction of Damascus, but at that time he thought it might come to pass due to the dangerous brew of the involvement of the U.S., Israel, the Palestinians, the Lebanese, Iran and Hezbollah in Syrian politics. The current plight of Syria, however, seems to be more down to rival ethnic and religious groups and competing militias and warlords tearing into each other. For what it is worth, here is a brief excerpt from this article:

QUOTE

...let us take a verse-by-verse examination of Isaiah Chapter 17. which begins with a foretelling of doom for the city of Damascus, Syria.

The demise of Damascus is prophesied in three different places in the Bible. Isaiah 17 is one of them. If this prophecy is yet future, awaiting fulfillment, it could happen soon. Damascus is a central hub of terrorism today. Several of the most prominent terrorist organizations have their headquarters there, and co-ordinate their operations from there. With the United States and Israel aligning against Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah, it is not hard to see today how circumstances could quickly fall into place.

When examining Bible prophecy, the question is not "if" what God said will happen, but "when". So our initial question for this chapter is this: has the destruction of Damascus, described here, occurred in history?

(Isaiah 17:1 ESV) An oracle concerning Damascus. Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city and will become a heap of ruins.

(Isaiah 17:1 JPS) The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

(Isaiah 17:1 NIV) An oracle concerning Damascus:See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins.

Looking at these three different translations, we see the prophecy is not only about the destruction of Damascus, but the thorough dissolution of its status as a city. Its "cityhood" will be taken away. After this oracle is fulfilled, there will never be a city called Damascus again. If Isaiah had only said "Damascus will be destroyed", then presumably, it could be rebuilt. But the impact is stronger than that. "Damascus will be negated from being a city." (Stone, Edition Tanach)

A phrase in verse three also confirms this. The sovereignty, the royal power, the kingdom "will disappear from Damascus." Though it is the seat of government, the capital of Syria, that status will be removed, and it will no longer function as such.

So we see that this prophecy could not have taken place, or else Damascus would not now exist as a city. Moreover, throughout its 5,000-year history, Damascus has never been completely destroyed, indeed (up until now) it has been the longest continuously-occupied settlement anywhere in the world...

@Tony Bennett wrote:As Syria tears itself apart and Damascus, its capital, is riven with a bitter civil war, attention has focussed on three passages of the Bible which foretell the complete and utter destruction of the city of Damascus.

One of them, the most detailed, is in the first few verses of Isaiah Chapter 17 (the other passages are in Jeremiah and in Psalm 83). It may be that Damascus will not be completely destroyed in the current conflict. But many Biblical commentators contend that it will be.

The author below wrote this piece over 7 years ago, in 2005. He foreshadowed the destruction of Damascus, but at that time he thought it might come to pass due to the dangerous brew of the involvement of the U.S., Israel, the Palestinians, the Lebanese, Iran and Hezbollah in Syrian politics. The current plight of Syria, however, seems to be more down to rival ethnic and religious groups and competing militias and warlords tearing into each other. For what it is worth, here is a brief excerpt from this article:

QUOTE

...let us take a verse-by-verse examination of Isaiah Chapter 17. which begins with a foretelling of doom for the city of Damascus, Syria.

The demise of Damascus is prophesied in three different places in the Bible. Isaiah 17 is one of them. If this prophecy is yet future, awaiting fulfillment, it could happen soon. Damascus is a central hub of terrorism today. Several of the most prominent terrorist organizations have their headquarters there, and co-ordinate their operations from there. With the United States and Israel aligning against Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah, it is not hard to see today how circumstances could quickly fall into place.

When examining Bible prophecy, the question is not "if" what God said will happen, but "when". So our initial question for this chapter is this: has the destruction of Damascus, described here, occurred in history?

(Isaiah 17:1 ESV) An oracle concerning Damascus. Behold, Damascus will cease to be a city and will become a heap of ruins.

(Isaiah 17:1 JPS) The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

(Isaiah 17:1 NIV) An oracle concerning Damascus:See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins.

Looking at these three different translations, we see the prophecy is not only about the destruction of Damascus, but the thorough dissolution of its status as a city. Its "cityhood" will be taken away. After this oracle is fulfilled, there will never be a city called Damascus again. If Isaiah had only said "Damascus will be destroyed", then presumably, it could be rebuilt. But the impact is stronger than that. "Damascus will be negated from being a city." (Stone, Edition Tanach)

A phrase in verse three also confirms this. The sovereignty, the royal power, the kingdom "will disappear from Damascus." Though it is the seat of government, the capital of Syria, that status will be removed, and it will no longer function as such.

So we see that this prophecy could not have taken place, or else Damascus would not now exist as a city. Moreover, throughout its 5,000-year history, Damascus has never been completely destroyed, indeed (up until now) it has been the longest continuously-occupied settlement anywhere in the world...

Did the author of thetrumpetsounds.etc. take the trouble to go through the Sykes - Picot treaty?

The Middle East was divided by France and Britain - borders were drawn on the basis of locations of known oil wells. The division of spoils as it were is exactly why the Middle East is such a mess now. As for the destruction of Damascus, it was a very popular formula to use for all sorts of cities, Nineveh, Babylon to name but two. I doubt the accuracy of prophesies myself, it's been proved that the book of Daniel though, is spot on with it's predictions, right up to 164 BC. after which it gets nearly everything totally wrong. That is because the book of Daniel was actually written in 164 and the predictions were more or less actual known history. They pulled a few fast ones in the olden days too!

@tigger wrote:Did the author of thetrumpetsounds.etc. take the trouble to go through the Sykes - Picot treaty?

The Middle East was divided by France and Britain - borders were drawn on the basis of locations of known oil wells. The division of spoils as it were is exactly why the Middle East is such a mess now.

It's certainly one of the reasons, tigger, but by no means the only one.

As for the destruction of Damascus, it was a very popular formula to use for all sorts of cities, Nineveh, Babylon to name but two.

True. Both Nineveh and Babylon were destroyed, as per prophecies; the destruction of Damascus has not taken place. Or at least, not yet.

I doubt the accuracy of prophecies myself, it's been proved that the book of Daniel though, is spot on with its predictions, right up to 164 BC.

That's correct

after which it gets nearly everything totally wrong. That is because the book of Daniel was actually written in 164 and the predictions were more or less actual known history. They pulled a few fast ones in the olden days too!

There are basically two alternative versions of the date of authorship of the Book of Daniel. There is no doubt at at all that he was a real, historical figure, who lived from approx 620BC to 520BC. Apart from the Bible, we have written evidence from the reign of King Darius, who appointed Daniel to the elevated position roughly equivalent to our Chancellor of the Exchequer of his empire - the Empire of the Persians and Medes.

Daniel was a multi-talented, but also entirely trustworthy, Hewrew. Darius's officials continually plotted against him, however, and succeeded in getting him thrown to the lions, which meant certain death. Except in Daniel's case. Again, this amazing event was sufficiently notable to be featured in extant Persian written records.

Before that, Daniel, who had been captured by Nebuchadnezzar and taken into exile in Babylon, along with most of the rest of the Hebrews, had been summoned to a feast by the King of Babylon, known usually as the feast of Babylon. He hadn't been invited originally, but because of his proven prophetic prowess, so to speak, the King called him in urgently when the King saw a supernatural finger writing these words on the wall: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, PERES.He didn't know what they meant, so summoned Daniel.

Daniel, literally, saw the writing on the wall (which is where we get this expression from), and told the King that the translation was: "God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and the Persians".

Within 24 hours, Babylon had fallen, and Belshazzar, King of the Chaldeans/Babylonians, had been killed. Thus the reign of King Darius the Median (the man who promoted Daniel to high office) began.

One indisputable fact is that the whole of Daniel 2 v 4 to Daniel 7 v 28 is written in Aramaic [smiliar to Syrian today], not Hebrew. Aramaic was the lingua franca of the time, i.e. the second language for most people of the world, just as English is today, and Greek was in Christ's time (Alexander the Great having created an enormous Greek Empire and having imposed the Greek language).

Those who deny that Daniel wrote the Book of Daniel during his lifetime must account for why so much of his book was written in Aramaic.

Here is one explanation:

Why did Daniel compose a portion of his revelation in a foreign language? Some have used this to argue a late date for the book of Daniel. Aramaic in fact was the common language in the 6th century B.C., not the Maccabean period (166 B.C) where Greek became the common language. Daniel's message was not only to the Jewish people, but to the nations. Aramaic in Daniel’s day is equivalent to English in our day. Daniel 2:4 to 7:28 would be accessible to any literate, Greek, Babylonian or Jew in Daniel’s day and later.

This is an extract from the following article, which discusses the two rival claims for the date of the authorship of Daniel - in his lifetime, as Jews and Christians claim, or around 166-164 BC as others claim.

The claim that Daniel was written at a much later date was made by those unable to accept that the Old Testament writers really did have the gift of accurate prophecy:

I'd have to look it up, but I'm pretty sure that Aramaic was the language spoken by Jesus. Greek certainly became the lingua franca after Alexander and Greek names (such as a Hebrew priest being called Menelaos in the first C) were fashionable.

The revelations of St. John are written in Greek (very bad Greek I understand) but a great deal of the New Testament had to be translated from Aramaic to Greek, hence the confusion about the word 'virgin'. Aramaic has a word for a young unmarried woman and a word for virgin. Greek only had one word to mean both. There are several other such problems with the translations.

I just googled this: Dr. Mark D. Roberts: Drawing from my background in New Testament studies, I tried to explain in non-technical terms the issues associated with the language or languages spoken by Jesus. My answer to the question “What language(s) did Jesus speak?” was representative of what most scholars of the New Testament believe, and was based on key passages from the New Testament itself, as well as an understanding of life in Judea during the first century A.D. In a nutshell, I showed that it’s most likely that Jesus spoke Aramaic as his primary language, and that he almost certainly knew Hebrew and perhaps Greek as well. It was unlikely, I argued, that Jesus spoke Latin, as envisioned in The Passion of the Christ. unquotehttp://www.academicearth.org/courses/new-testament-history-and-literature - has an excellent series of lectures from Yale university.

Paul probably wrote and spoke Greek, but he was an educated man. The apostles by all accounts weren't.So no, I don't believe in prophecies in general anyway, there are patterns in history and they repeat.

Aramaic was definitely in use during and after 164 BC.

I don't doubt that there are prophesies which came true but imo that's mostly because wiser men/women could understand the patterns of history: 'If you do x, y will happen.' I studied Western Asia as part of my degree. Fascinating, thanks to the clay tablets we know quite a lot. What's happening now has happened several times over the last three/ four thousand years or so. Assyria was the most powerful of the 'countries' for hundreds of years. They achieved that was by having a large standing army. They would not bother to occupy the countries they ravaged but simply extracted a yearly tribute. It worked as a sort of huge protection racket. Sorry Tony, we're not going to agree on this. Spin goes back a long way!

@tigger wrote:I just googled this: Dr. Mark D. Roberts: Drawing from my background in New Testament studies, I tried to explain in non-technical terms the issues associated with the language or languages spoken by Jesus. My answer to the question “What language(s) did Jesus speak?” was representative of what most scholars of the New Testament believe, and was based on key passages from the New Testament itself, as well as an understanding of life in Judea during the first century A.D. In a nutshell, I showed that it’s most likely that Jesus spoke Aramaic as his primary language, and that he almost certainly knew Hebrew and perhaps Greek as well. It was unlikely, I argued, that Jesus spoke Latin, as envisioned in The Passion of the Christ. unquote

Paul probably wrote and spoke Greek, but he was an educated man. The apostles by all accounts weren't.

Aramaic was definitely in use during and after 164 BC.

tigger, here is a scholarly summary of the langauge issue, and it concerns the Jews from the Babylonian exile onwards, the probable language mostly used by Christ and the Jews of the time (Hebrew rather than Aramaic), and by Paul etc.:

Why did Daniel compose a portion of his revelation in a foreign language? Some have used this to argue a late date for the book of Daniel. Aramaic in fact was the common language in the 6th century B.C., not the Maccabean period (166 B.C) where Greek became the common language. Daniel's message was not only to the Jewish people, but to the nations. Aramaic in Daniel’s day is equivalent to English in our day. Daniel 2:4 to 7:28 would be accessible to any literate, Greek, Babylonian or Jew in Daniel’s day and later. unquote

This was the paragraph which is erroneous. Aramaic was definitely in use during the Maccabean period and therefore the above argument re Daniel is invalid.

But I agree that any educated Jew would speak Hebrew as it's impossible to study Torah without it. Aramaic was one might say what English was in the Middle Ages, spoken by 'ordinary' people, the ruling classes spoke French (Greek) even if they knew and understood English (Aramaic) wouldn't speak it.

Jesus was a Rabbi and went around teaching - which is what Rabbis are supposed to do. The common people would be mostly illiterate, as according to accounts were the apostles. Jesus would have had to teach mostly in Aramaic, since the lower classes would have neither sufficient Hebrew or Greek to understand him.

* by the time of Christ, Greek, or koine Greek, had become, according the sources I've looked up, the lingua franca in much of the Medierranean but maybe not in Judaea and surrounding parts of the Roman Empire. The Septuagint (Greek) translation of the Old Testament was carried out in the 2nd century basically to cater for the needs of expatriate Jews who were Greek-speaking

* the same sources suggest that you are correct, that Aramaic was still very much in use amongst poorer-off Jews and Samarians around the time of Christ

* bringing these issues into the debate about when Daniel was written, I suspect that you and I could agree that Aramaic was in regular use in the Assyrian/Babylonian empires and was in use during Daniel's lifetime (approx 620 -520 BC) but also in the time of Christ.

If we are agreed on that, then the fact that Daniel 2 v 4 to Daniel 7 v 28 was written in Aramaic does not by itself help us either way. The fact that nearly half of the Book of Daniel was written in Aramaic is most certainly consistent with Daniel himself writi8ng it, but equally is consistent with those who claim it was written in the Maccabean period (2nd century BC).

So, moving on to consider whether Christ routinely spoke in Hebrew or Aramaic, authors seem to be divided on the subject. The 'LearnAramaic' blogspot, from which I quote below, is one source that believes that Christ spoke mostly in Aramaic, for the reasons you suggest.

I am not sure in what language the priests read out the Old Testament srcolls to their synagogues on the sabbath. Was it from the Hebrew texts (later the Massoretic text), or was it from Aramaic translations? It seems no-one is absolutely sure, though I've only had time to scan a few sources.

To take a specific example, look at Luke 4 vv 16-31. Here, Christ comes to the synagogue at Nazareth, his home town. He stood up and read a scroll from the Book of Isaiah. He then made the exceptionally bold claim that this very scripture from Isaiah was being literally fulfilled in their presence. When the congregation realised the claim He was making, they angrily turned on Him and tried to push him over a nearby cliff - but failed (vv 29-30).

Did he read to them from a Hebrew scroll? Or from an Aramaic translation?

It is also hypothesized that he also spoke Hebrew and even some Greek and Latin.

At the time Aramaic was a major language and a lingua franca among the population in the Near East. It was widely spoken in Palestine even among the Jews who spoke it as a second language along with Hebrew.

In the New Testament, the Greek original, there are some utterances of Jesus in Aramaic which is clear evidence about his native tongue.

Jesus grew up in Galilea,a region where many cultures existed and many languages were spoken.But Aramaic and Hebrew were not the only ones spoken by the local population.Around Nazareth ,especially in the city of Sephoris lived the Greek-speaking Gentiles.So Jesus might have picked up some Greek.Latin was the official language of the region being under Roman occupation.The main work that survives in Galilean Aramaic is the Jerusalem Talmud written in 2 A.D.. in Israel.It is older than the Babylonian Talmud by 2 centuries.Other important texts in the dialect are early works of Kabbalah.

Linguistically it belongs to West Aramaic related more closely to Samaritan and Christian Palestine.

Two villages in the Holy Land’s tiny Christian community are teaching Aramaic in an ambitious effort to revive the language that Jesus spoke, centuries after it all but disappeared from the Middle East.

The new focus on the region’s dominant language 2,000 years ago comes with a little help from modern technology: an Aramaic-speaking television channel from Sweden, of all places, where a vibrant immigrant community has kept the ancient tongue alive.In the Palestinian village of Beit Jala, an older generation of Aramaic speakers is trying to share the language with their grandchildren. Beit Jala lies next to Bethlehem, where the New Testament says Jesus was born.

And in the Arab-Israeli village of Jish, nestled in the Galilean hills where Jesus lived and preached, elementary school children are now being instructed in Aramaic. The children belong mostly to the Maronite Christian community. Maronites still chant their liturgy in Aramaic but few understand the prayers.

“We want to speak the language that Jesus spoke,” said Carla Hadad, a 10-year-old Jish girl who frequently waved her arms to answer questions in Aramaic from school teacher Mona Issa during a recent lesson.

“We used to speak it a long time ago,” she added, referring to her ancestors.

Atif Zarka, 64, a volunteer Aramaic teacher's assistant holds a copy of the Gospel of Luke in Aramaic script in the Arab village of Jish, northern Israel.During the lesson, a dozen children lisped out a Christian prayer in Aramaic. They learned the words for “elephant,” ”how are you?” and “mountain.” Some children carefully drew sharp-angled Aramaic letters. Others fiddled with their pencil cases, which sported images of popular soccer teams.

The dialect taught in Jish and Beit Jala is “Syriac,” which was spoken by their Christian forefathers and resembles the Galilean dialect that Jesus would have used, according to Steven Fassberg, an Aramaic expert at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.“They probably would have understood each other,” Fassberg said.

In Jish, about 80 children in grades one through five study Aramaic as a voluntary subject for two hours a week. Israel’s education ministry provided funds to add classes until the eighth grade, said principal Reem Khatieb-Zuabi.

Several Jish residents lobbied for Aramaic studies several years ago, said Khatieb-Zuabi, but the idea faced resistance: Jish’s Muslims worried it was a covert attempt to entice their children to Christianity. Some Christians objected, saying the emphasis on their ancestral language was being used to strip them of their Arab identity. The issue is sensitive to many Arab Muslims and Christians in Israel, who prefer to be identified by their ethnicity, not their faith.

“This is our collective heritage and culture. We should celebrate and study it,” the principal said. And so the Jish Elementary School become the only Israeli public school teaching Aramaic, according to the education ministry.

Their efforts are mirrored in Beit Jala’s Mar Afram school run by the Syrian Orthodox church and located just a few miles (kilometers) from Bethlehem’s Manger Square.

There, priests have taught the language to their 320 students for the past five years.

Some 360 families in the area descend from Aramaic-speaking refugees who in the 1920s fled the Tur Abdin region of what is now Turkey.

Priest Butros Nimeh said elders still speak the language but that it vanished among younger generations. Nimeh said they hoped teaching the language would help the children appreciate their roots.

Although both the Syrian Orthodox and Maronite church worship in Aramaic, they are distinctly different sects.

The Maronites are the dominant Christian church in neighboring Lebanon but make up only a few thousand of the Holy Land’s 210,000 Christians. Likewise, Syrian Orthodox Christians number no more than 2,000 in the Holy Land, said Nimeh. Overall, some 150,000 Christians live in Israel and another 60,000 live in the West Bank.

Both schools found inspiration and assistance in an unlikely place: Sweden. There, Aramaic-speaking communities who descended from the Middle East have sought to keep their language alive.

They publish a newspaper, “Bahro Suryoyo,” pamphlets and children’s books, including “The Little Prince,” and maintain a satellite television station, “Soryoyosat,” said Arzu Alan, chairwoman of the Syriac Aramaic Federation of Sweden.

There’s also an Aramaic soccer team, “Syrianska FC” in the Swedish top division from the town of Sodertalje. Officials estimate the Aramaic-speaking population at anywhere from 30,000 to 80,000 people.

For many Maronites and Syrian Orthodox Christians in the Holy Land, the television station, in particular, was the first time they heard the language outside church in decades. Hearing it in a modern context inspired them to try revive the language among their communities.

“When you hear (the language), you can speak it,” said Issa, the teacher.

Aramaic dialects were the region’s vernacular from 2,500 years ago until the sixth century, when Arabic, the language of conquering Muslims from the Arabian Peninsula, became dominant, according to Fassberg.

Linguistic islands survived: Maronites clung to Aramaic liturgy and so did the Syrian Orthodox church. Kurdish Jews on the river island of Zakho spoke an Aramaic dialect called “Targum” until fleeing to Israel in the 1950s. Three Christian villages in Syria still speak an Aramaic dialect, Fassberg said.

With few opportunities to practice the ancient tongue, teachers in Jish have tempered expectations. They hope they can at least revive an understanding of the language.

The steep challenges are seen in the Jish school, where the fourth-grade Aramaic class has just a dozen students. The number used to be twice that until they introduced an art class during the same time slot — and lost half their students.

____________________

"Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 - "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"

(Meanwhile, here's a Retters report from Damascus at just after 6pm tonight...)

++++++++++++++++++++

(Reuters) - From the center of Damascus, Syrians can see the shrouds of smoke rising overhead and feel the shake of explosions that warn of a frontline creeping ever closer.

The same squares where President Bashar al-Assad once drew tens of thousands to cheer in support lie empty and walled off by concrete barriers up to two meters (six feet) high.

Damascus is bracing itself after nearly two years of civil conflict as rebel forces seep deeper into the capital, and anxiety is etched across the faces of people in the city center.

"There is fear and pain in people's hearts, a feeling of despair and paralysis because of the enormity of the crisis," said Suad, an architect in the Salihiya neighborhood. "The sounds of all the different explosions - mortar, artillery and warplanes - suggest the frontline is getting closer," she said.

This ancient city has survived conquests down the ages, from Alexander the Great to early Arab caliphs and Crusaders. Sacked by Mongol invaders in 1400, it was later taken by the Turks and seized more than once by European armies last century. Now Damascus is under attack again, this time by its own people.

On Sunday, warplanes raided the Palestinian refugee district of Yarmouk, one of the most densely populated parts of the capital, where concrete homes are piled upon each other. The air strike, believed to have killed 25 people, was the closest yet to the city center, little more than a mile away.

The army warned Yarmouk's impoverished Syrian and Palestinian residents to flee in preparation for a "cleansing" operation, as bombardment ratchets up the intensity of a week of internal clashes between Palestinians for and against Assad.

Late on Monday, rebels said they had taken control of the camp, while government forces massed on its northern edge.

A new wave, thousands-strong is now seeking refuge. They are the latest victims of violence that has already forced people to flee many suburbs around Damascus, as rebels tighten their grip on the eastern outskirts of the city and its southern districts.

Um Hassan's family is fleeing for the third time in months. They fled two sieges of other rebel-held suburbs. Now their new rented apartment in Yarmouk is under fire: "Once again, I have to move. I really don't know when this will end," she said.

"God help us."

NO SAFE PLACE

Assad has support in Damascus - among fellow Alawites who fear collective retribution if he falls and also from Christians worried by radical Sunni Islamists among the rebels. Many Damascenes from the Sunni majority long, too, for a return to stability and fear Assad's departure would usher in only chaos.

Others pray he will flee, in the hope that will end the war.

Whatever their political views, civilians are putting safety first. Families and friends with homes in more central parts of Damascus have been taking in beleaguered refugees. But there are signs that generosity may be reaching its limits.

"I have moved into my parents' house along with all my siblings' families. My wife's house is full of her aunts and uncles. Who has room now?," said Issam, a resident of central Damascus. "Most families I know are like this, and I want to know what will happen to the refugees who come now."

Walking to his parents' house from work this week, he thinks some of the new homeless have found an answer: "In some shopping districts, the shutters that cover storefronts aren't locked.

"If you look inside, you can see whole families have moved inside. They can't go home."

Despite the flow into the city center, still relatively safe, rents have dropped and some apartments are empty.

"I rent my place for 70 percent of what I used to, and that's when I can find a tenant," one resident said. "You'd think the demand should be up...but there's a sense that no place is really safe."

Informal charity networks are springing up, though many residents who fear the ire of Assad's security forces still keep their work secret.

Wael, who has organized a weekly charity drive with a group of college students, chooses a focus for help each week: "Sometimes we do children's packages. Sometimes women's packages, sometimes men's," he said.

"This week we're going to focus on those from Yarmouk."

INTERNAL FRONTIERS

Syrians in the capital are quietly preparing for the worst.

Everyone wants an electricity generator as supply gets more erratic. One shop in the walled Old City said it was selling 25 machines a day. Fuel is nearly impossible to find and a cylinder of gas goes for four times the normal price at about $20.

In rebel-held eastern suburbs on the outskirts, cars ignore traffic lights. All the signals have been damaged by fighting or disabled by power cuts.

Damascus has new internal borders: Tadamun and Qadam, southern neighborhoods of the capital, are clearly in rebel control. The fighters man checkpoints, oversee bread distribution at bakeries and bring in food from rural areas nearby that are also under rebel control.

Those same rural areas are now off-limits to many displaced families who fled their homes and are not allowed back past Syrian army checkpoints.

"I don't know what happened to my home; it's in an area to the east," said Issam. "My neighbors moved to central Damascus too, and they don't know what has happened to their shops. Everyone is waiting to see what is left of their lives there."

Last week, a civilian plane flew over - a rare sight since fighting engulfed the roads leading to the airports - and gave a rare spark of hope for some, like Khaled, an office worker.

He prays next time it will be a plane taking Assad off into exile: "People hope they will wake up one day and see he has fled the country peacefully."

(Writing by Erika Solomon; Editing by Alastair Macdonald)

____________________

"Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 - "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"

That's very good news about the study of Aramaic. I believe that languages are very important and in the UK the Welsh and Gaelic are at least kept alive. Cornish has all but disappeared when one would have hoped it would persist as did the Breton language. Edward I, I believe, started the campaign to obliterate the Welsh language, language is the greater part of an identity of a country or a group of people (e.g. Jiddish). By destroying the language, you destroy the identity.

We will have to agree to disagree about Daniel. Aramaic isn't a valid argument as to the date when it was written. But getting pretty nearly all your predictions right before 164 BC and everything after that wrong is a pretty strong point imo.

Incidentally, the general feeling about the letters of Paul is that they were written by different people. I think it's the later writings which are in doubt. This is based on the style of writing and indeed the content which often contradicts the earlier instructions.

The general feeling in religious studies is that Jesus preached to the Jews but unusually included gentiles as being eligible to get to heaven. It was a new kind of Judaism. After the destruction of the Temple, Paul was the first to make an effort to include gentiles in this 'New Judaism' .

Re Damascus I disagree, this is a take-over by rebels, not a foreign power. The general idea is that one takes over the capital of whatever dictator/king and moves into his place. Just using the presidential palace gives the conquerer credibility in the eyes of the people.

@tigger wrote:.. . language is the greater part of an identity of a country or a group of people (e.g. Yiddish). By destroying the language, you destroy the identity. . .

Indeed so, but it might have been the very reason the Ashkenazim jews were so feared and eventually so hated across Europe and across history.Consider.They come as immigrants into a country, from somewhere else of which the indigenous community has no knowledge, they have their own religious beliefs, they refuse to convert, they run their own schools, and above all they are literate.That in itself is very frightening.No one is allowed to 'join' or to leave. Miscegenation is not permitted. Rituals are secret and never explained, and above all there is the sense that they consider themselves superior to all others. God's Chosen People, in fact.They wear special clothes, and speak a secret language which no one else can even begin to understand. Not even the local priest. Even the writing is a secret code.They have a work ethic and an extended family structure which means that they can become affluent more quickly than those who do not.They are prepared to take on the tasks that others either will not, or that the rest of society permit them - cobblers and tailors being the two most quoted examples. But those two trades bring them into regular intimate contact with the members of the surrounding community, and from their clients they learn all sorts of gossip and secrets. Knowledge is power, but that fact that they now seem to know all the secrets of the greater community is also very worrying, and hints at something different.They are also allowed to become money lenders, which is where people really begin to hate them - making money for doing nothing.

And above all is the emphasis on blood. Meat must be drained of blood, menstruation is a particular taboo, blood sacrifices and burnt offerings are part of the ancient culture, Passover required blood to be smeared on the doorpost . . . and within a very short time the "Blood Libel" is in full swing.

It is not difficult to see why pogroms were organised from time to time. It doesn't take much to scapegoat a community which acts in this way.

I agree with you to a great extend, but the Ashkenazy Jews were also prohibited from quite a number of professions. So that would add to the separation. I would think that they did speak the native language of the country they lived in (Poland, Russia) well enough to trade. The Hassidic Jews aren't popular in Israel. It's quite a long time ago I was in Israel, but there I found it difficult to distinguish between the Arabs and the Israelis. All semites. Most of my friends there are academics and fervent atheists. The Americans and surprisingly a large German group are fiercely biblical in their outlook. One German professor took us to a spot where according to him Gideon fought some or other battle. The exact spot no less.

I am very tempted to explain the Ashkenazy according to Koestler's 'The thirteenth tribe'. Their physical appearance is totally non-semitic.

@tigger wrote:I agree with you to a great extend, but the Ashkenazy Jews were also prohibited from quite a number of professions. So that would add to the separation. I would think that they did speak the native language of the country they lived in (Poland, Russia) well enough to trade. The Hassidic Jews aren't popular in Israel. It's quite a long time ago I was in Israel, but there I found it difficult to distinguish between the Arabs and the Israelis. All semites. Most of my friends there are academics and fervent atheists. The Americans and surprisingly a large German group are fiercely biblical in their outlook. One German professor took us to a spot where according to him Gideon fought some or other battle. The exact spot no less.

I am very tempted to explain the Ashkenazy according to Koestler's 'The thirteenth tribe'. Their physical appearance is totally non-semitic.

Yes, they certainly learn the language of the region they inhabit, hence the creation of Yiddish (= Judisch), but in private ( in secret,) probably spoke Hebrew, and thereby confirmed the secrecy. The Hassidim are causing serious problems for the very existence of Israel, by refusing to work or to serve in the Army, and remaining almost totally uneducated, except for their 8 hours of religious study. No one knows what to do about them. And they are having 6 - 7 children per family, against 2 -3 for more normal Israelis.

@tigger wrote:We will have to agree to disagree about Daniel. Aramaic isn't a valid argument as to the date when it was written. But getting pretty nearly all your predictions right before 164 BC and everything after that wrong is a pretty strong point imo...

If Daniel got any prediction/prophecy wrong, let alone lots of them, then that would indeed, I accept, be a pretty strong point.

It is obvious we are not going to agree re Daniel, and I am happy to leave it there, after all, we have important work still to do re Madeleine.

However, I would like to respond if I may to your post by asking you to give one (or more if you can) example of a prophecy in the Book of Daniel that is 'wrong'.

If you can produce one, I'll be happy to respond.

____________________

"Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 - "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"

Here is a short piece on it: It was under Seleucid persecution (167-164 B.C.) that the book of Daniel was probably completed, using stories in its first half known from earlier years. The book's inaccurate description of the end of the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and his death, and its failure to mention the success of the Maccabean revolt, indicate that the book was finished before 164 B.C. Also, its prophesies of the end of the age in a matter of years (12:6-13) are not fulfilled. But the Jews under persecution were meant to be strengthened by the book's stories and visions, assuring them that God will deliver the faithful. With the coming Messianic age, whatever the time frame, the book of Daniel's ultimate message is: the righteous, though afflicted, through the sovereignty of God will gloriously get out of it. unquote

That is, Daniel was aware of the descration of the Temple, but not of the Maccabean revolt and subsequent success.

The earlier parts of the book of Daniel also contain a few Greek loan words which would not have been current in the 6th C.

I'm looking for the Yale University lecture on this and will post it for you when I find it.